Vic Sage

I found my Cameron Crowe article: viewtopic.php?f=11&t=9063&p=221459#p221459

yes, some survival instinct kicked in an prevented me from ever seeing it.

probably my least favorite of the Cameron Crowe ouevre, but i still liked it overall. I posted a lengthy discussion of Crowe's films (focusing on ALMOST FAMOUS) somewhere in the black pit of the Pool.

You have contempt for my generation? Whatever, dude! well, if the generation's values and character are defined by such films as these, who wouldn't be contemptuous? But I will certainly grant you that the films (and my prejudices) may be heinously inaccurate in that regard... Still, i start from a premise of contempt and modify from there. Its my job as a cynic and misanthrope.

This brilliant thriller still works because it is utterly unreliant on effects and depends, instead, on script, performances and formalist (rather than formulaic) storytelling devices , like textbook use of music to heighten tension. Its themes are as universal as Ahab, and so the story is not dated by parochial messages or concerns. Beyond its quality as a film, it invented the modern Hollywood blockbuster and became an important touchstone in our cultural history. It also launched the career of one of the most influential filmmakers of the late 20th century.

i liked them both, mostly because i too had contempt for the Gen x it was (probably falsely) portraying. It reinforced my prior notions about the generation that came after me, in an amusing way. I would likely hate them both, however, if i were of that generation.

As a kid, i remember watching COURTSHIP OF EDDIE'S FATHER, and i loved the opening title song. Then, i saw a tv special called the POINT, and my brother told me the same guy wrote the CEF theme song, and he gave me the album NILLSON, SCHMILLSON and i became a fan. He had this lovely voice, and wrote songs which juxtaposed old fashioned sort of melodies with bizarre, darkly comic lyrics. I liked SON OF SCHMILLSON too, though it was more inconsistent. I liked the John Lennon-produced PUSSYCATS, but you could definitely hear the strain on his voice. I lost track of him after that. I watched the doc on Netflix and found it compelling enough.

I wanted to comment on this after some thought , it holds up better than Jaws IMHO... i think you needed some more thought.

congrats on your clean sweep, but that night was hardly "perfect". It was just about the worst Oscar show ever.

i gave it 2.5, just cuz i love Jeff Goldblum and the dinos are pretty cool. but otherwise, what Bucket said.

i'll take Chase Utley.

http://abcnews.go.com/WhatWouldYouDo/ginger-abuse-witnessed-discrimination-redhead/story?id=12929946 Ginger Abuse: Tackling Redhead Harassment What Would You Do If You Saw a Redhead Face Cruel Taunts? By LARA GLASWAND

Ceetar wrote: Ceetar wrote: I expect him to be a low-level contributor to the best offense in the league in 2011. So, you think he'll be traded? Optimism is not a sin. It's not a virtue, either. It's merely a psychological quirk, like any other.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: 10. America the country or the band?

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: I stand by my position. She's like a hot alien. A hot-bomination. i couldn't agree less. Except i think that's Maureen O'Hara, not Rita Hayworth.

F-Rod ® - CL Parnell ® - setup/CL Carrasco ® - middle/setup Acosta ® - middle/setup Buchholtz ® - middle/setup/spot-starter Beato ® - rule V ROOGY Byrdak (L)*- LOOGY * not on 40-man roster

someone's been reading my posts... http://www.amazinavenue.com/2011/1/13/1930768/the-k-rod-plan Because there's a new regime in town, they have an advantage: the ability to frame the changes as part of an overhaul of how the team is run, all the way down to how the Closer is used. Just call him a "Moneyball Closer," and maybe people will nod sagely and miss the point.

My son and i enjoyed it thoroughly, even though neither of us is partial to Michael Cera-hipster-snark or even anime-with-a-wink. In fact, we generally prefer our anime winkless and our Cera snarkless.

.280 / 10hr / 30sb - less defensive range, but still ok. Wilpons won't spend the money to re-sign him.

i think predicting a .500 season is about right. his caveat about that being without even predicting any great years is balanced by not predicting any disastrous years either. that stuff is a wash. 80-85 wins seems about right to me. I don't think that's anything to get too excited about, but whatever.

Projection: 2011 opening roster / 40-man roster (revised) THE FOUR QUESTIONS -- rotation: Pelfrey Dickey Niese (LH) Chris Young * Capuano (LH)* *[DL - Santana (Lh)] *[Traded or DFAd: O.Perez, Misch (Lh)] *[sent down: Gee, Mejia, Ar.Rodriguez, Stinson] Question - Do they lose Misch? cut Perez? bullpen: F-Rod Parnell Carrasco Acosta Buchholz Byrdak* Beato** *= non-roster **= rule V draftee [sent down: M.Alvarez] [invitees cut or sign minor league deals: O'Connor, Tankersley, Fossum, Igarashi, Bonser, Boyer, Stoner] Question - Which LOOGY do they use? Do they keep Beato and lose Misch, Perez, and all the other invitees? Lineup: ss - Reyes (sw) cf - Pagan (sw) 3b - Wright (rh) RF - Beltran (Sw) LF - Bay (rh) 1b - Davis (lh) 2b - Murphy (lh) / Emaus (rh)* C - Thole (lh) / Paulino [Nickeas](rh)** *= rule V draftee **[suspended: Paulino for first 8 games] Question - Does Murphy win the 2b job? Emaus platoon? Cut Castillo? Bench: C - Paulino [Nickeas] / Thole (Lh) 1b/2B/3B - Emaus / Murphy (Lh) OF/Rh - Scott Hairston OF/Lh - Willie Harris* 2b/ss - Hu** * = non-roster *[Traded or DFA: N.Evans] **[Traded or DFA: Hernandez, Castillo] [sent down: F.Martinez, Duda, Lutz, Tejada, Turner, Valdespin, Gronauer, Neiuwenheis] [invitees cut or signed to minor league deals: Chavez, Ryan, Adams, Pridie]

8 days

projecting relievers is a largely futile excercise. except for the inevitable blown elbow.

Under the Mets' new method, scouts will scramble all over the country to cover three major league teams and about 16 minor league clubs, and will rarely be able to see two of their assigned teams in a single game. That will likely lead to increased travel expenses, inconveniences in scheduling and difficulties in seeing individual teams and players often enough. These logistical obstacles to seeing everybody often enough may require management to rely more on quantatative analysis... which may part of the point. which is fine with me. At any rate, deeper knowledge is better.

baseball salary arbitrations are loaded with discussions of a player's use, and teams justifying their usage and denigrating the player, all in order to keep salary low -- and players are making arguments to these same arbitrators about their relative value. Their agents create the equivalent of private placement memoranda for these arbitrators, who are no more qualified to assess these matters than an arbitrator hearing the theoretical grievance F-Rod would make in this situation. to say that arbitrators have no right, or should not be required, to hear such evidence, would throw out the salary arbitration system along with bath water (not that that's necessarily a bad thing). so i don't get why you think an arbitrator can't hear such evidence to determine whether a contract has been breached because of "bad faith". If, in fact, the Mets did use F-Rod in low leverage situations, that would be pretty strong evidence that they were just acting to void his deal. And yeah, players (and anybody else entering into a contract) has a right to expect the other party to behave in a way that doesn't render the contract void. It undermines the very notion of a contract. but thankfully Mets management is not this stupid... well, not anymore anyway. They could simply use F-Rod in the best way possible to make use of him to win games, and as a side benefit, end up getting out from under one of Omar's dumber moves.